Technically the third world is one where the countries involved are not aligned to the first world (USA, NATO, Japan, etc.) or the second world (Russia, China and what was the Warsaw Pact). All the rest are the third world. Countries that have little or no influence on the two main blocs. Things are changing and the old model is not static. The Arab countries have financial muscle. But the third world consists of unaligned countries with no power to influence what goes on in the world. Some countries are moving towards groups with influence, others are moving away.

The reason I think that the UK is becoming a third world state is that we only have a semblance of civilisation which will last until those that own all the assets pack up their bags and walk. All the essential services have been sold to overseas owners. The railways are owned by residents of tax havens, the government is trying to sell the NHS to American insurance companies, the Motor industry in the UK is foreign owned and threatening to move overseas, even the farmers are moving out because there is no labour. Once the UK has been milked of its assets, all the owners will move on. There will be nothing left. It’s just a matter of time.

aero280, I can’t let you get away with describing the UK as a third world country. The term comes from the Cold War, those who aligned themselves with NATO/USA were first world, alignment with the Communist Bloc, second and the rest, third. I agree with you on the strange arrangement we have insofar as the current philosophy is against Nationalisation, but allows it if other countries own our utilities etc.

cooksalot, the number of voters who exercised their right to vote was 72.7%, not 37%.

In the UK it is unusual for the winning party to gain more than 50% of the vote - Blair in 2005 was 35.2%, even Thatcher in 1979 only reached 44%. The referendum was no different, being 37%

I am aware of a LSE academic writing a book about gerrymandering but I don’t follow his argument.

I’d never look to Twitter for accurate information.

I voted Remain.

Every day is a good day, it's just that some days are better than others.

The biggest insanity of the referendum was to hold it as a 'first past the post' type vote ....... it could've been down to one vote!!! A recipe for public unrest ........ I think Remainers have remained incredibly calm in the circumstances. Most referendums which are about a change as big as Brexit need a bigger majority than that to change the status quo ... Cameron was a total idiot and he knows it.If it had been organised on a proper basis and Brexit had won I'd have been disappointed but content with the result but this is the result of total idiocy on the part of the Cameron government

Dennis, in response to your point about the number of voters who exercised their right to vote being 72.7%, not 37%, I am referring to how many of the population turned out. 37% of the electorate became 52% of voters - you can't force people to vote but I agree with Suffs that democracy was not served in this ill thought out referendum.Cameron promised a referendum in order to keep the eurosceptic section of his party quiet. He was worried about leaching votes to Ukip. This referendum was NOT about the best interests of the country, but about him gaining an advantage at the election. Young people were excluded, unlike in the Scottish Indy referendum. Many British citizens abroad were denied a vote. European citizens living here were denied a vote although Commonwealth citizens were given one. People were not asked to make up their minds on the basis of rational argument and a full presentation of the facts. Both campaigns were dreadful! George Osborne promised a ‘ punishment budget’ if we left and Johnson and Gove made promises that can only be described as outrageous lies. The level of debate dived to new lows. An MP was murdered in the street by a far right terrorist. The minute the Leave result was announced, it became clear there was not even the beginning of a plan of what to do next. We were sold Brexit on the basis of lies, misinformation and wild exaggeration, but we are now stuck with it as “the will of the people”.Along with many other like minded folk I will continue to fight Brexit tooth and nail.

cooksalot wrote:Dennis, in response to your point about the number of voters who exercised their right to vote being 72.7%, not 37%, I am referring to how many of the population turned out. 37% of the electorate became 52% of voters - you can't force people to vote but I agree with Suffs that democracy was not served in this ill thought out referendum.Cameron promised a referendum in order to keep the eurosceptic section of his party quiet. He was worried about leaching votes to Ukip. This referendum was NOT about the best interests of the country, but about him gaining an advantage at the election. Young people were excluded, unlike in the Scottish Indy referendum. Many British citizens abroad were denied a vote. European citizens living here were denied a vote although Commonwealth citizens were given one. People were not asked to make up their minds on the basis of rational argument and a full presentation of the facts. Both campaigns were dreadful! George Osborne promised a ‘ punishment budget’ if we left and Johnson and Gove made promises that can only be described as outrageous lies. The level of debate dived to new lows. An MP was murdered in the street by a far right terrorist. The minute the Leave result was announced, it became clear there was not even the beginning of a plan of what to do next. We were sold Brexit on the basis of lies, misinformation and wild exaggeration, but we are now stuck with it as “the will of the people”.Along with many other like minded folk I will continue to fight Brexit tooth and nail.

I'm with you all the way and am actively , through my UK MP; fighting to restore our right to a vote for life, especially as a UK tax payers. Unfortunately not much more we can do, but our application for French citizenship is ready to go should all else fail.

Cooking for those you care about is the most profound expression of love - Anne-Sophie Pic

Although I voted Remain (my folks were immigrant refugees after all), I realise know how little I knew when I voted. I’ve been educating myself and what I have seen and have found out is mostly scary...But there is so much hope, young people, who will be most affected by the betrayal of many of their elders are mobilising. If they get out to vote the current political establishment will reap a whirlwind! Rats, there are people working to speak for citizens like yourself, who were denied a voice, for example britishineurope.org We’ll keep on fighting this!

I understand that we are not supposed to discuss politics on the forum. What disturbs me about this thread is that it has become a ‘remainders only’ thread. If anyone was to put forward a pro brexit view, then it would presumably be construed as being argumentative. I have no axe to grind here, it just seems very one sided and unfair.

I've been fairly active in this thread, so I could be seen as having an interest.

If it gets really bad, it will be locked, but not by me! Others are already keeping an eye on it. It may be one sided, but it may also reflect the reality of the problem. Too many "remainers" didn't vote when they had the chance, and should have done.

But, as has been said, something like this should never have been a 50/50 vote. It should have needed a two-thirds majority. Even then, it wasn't a binding vote, it was billed as "advisory". it was the government that decided it was "binding". Perhaps they should not have done that. They could have used the closeness of the vote to start the negotiating and then made a decision. Now they have backed themselves into a corner.

One of the results is back to the original point of the thread. Once we are on our own, we will be in a weak position and maybe unable to stop the sale of "possibly unsafe" food in the UK. If it's made a condition of a trade deal, and we need the trade, we may not be able to refuse.

I am going to post this again, in the hope that maybe some of those that did not fully read it last time will take the valid points on board and realise that this is no where near the end of the world......

Hi, this is Zosheroony's husband. I believe you probably know me best as Mr. Zosh. Mrs. Zosh has asked me to right down the reasons why I voted for exit, so here goes.

Firstly, I would like to let you know where I am coming from. I am very pro-European. It is the European union I have a problem with. I have spent twenty years of my life working and travelling throughout Europe, selling into the European market. I have visited almost every country in Europe, most of them several times. I speak quite good German and tourist French. I love Europe. I think it is an absolutely brilliant place full of culture and interest. I married a girl who is half Polish. I have enormous respect for the Poles and the people of the former Soviet Union who have now joined the EC. I was privileged to visit their countries after the soviet system had broken down and there was nothing to replace it and to see the way they coped with their dire situation.

In 197? I voted to join the Common Market. That was the way it was sold to us then. I believe in free trade, as most people do. I did not vote for the crazy bureaucracy that is the present European Union.

Germany joined the EU after losing two world wars; Italy after Mussolini; Spain after Franco; France, Belgium, Holland etc after twice being invaded by Germany. The former soviet bloc joined after 50 years of soviet oppression. Britain joined after 150 years of liberal democracy. We have a different perspective. I can fully understand why the union is important to these countries. It is not so important to this island nation.

I don't know what sort of deal we are likely to get from Europe in the end. If the worst possible scenario happens we will have to pay import duties to export into Europe. So what? We really don't export anything much into Europe on the basis of being the cheapest anyway. We add value. We are really good at this. I used to travel on DTI Trade Missions selling into Europe. I have been in embassies and consulates around Europe at meetings and receptions full of British sales people pitching their goods and services to the locals. I distinctly remember sometimes looking around me and being amazed at how good the people around me were at doing this. By the way, sadly, there were never any Ferrero Roche. Trading successfully seems to be part of our DNA. We can do it within or without the EU. I have personally successfully exported without any problems worldwide outside of the EU. You simply have to produce an export invoice and the importer (your customer) has to pay import duties. Yes, this adds a cost (in the case of the EU we are talking single digit duties mostly around 4%) and reduces your competitiveness but it can still be done.

Further, as the world's 5th biggest economy, I am pretty confident we will do some kind of a deal with Europe. Apparently, we are the single biggest export market for BMW and VW Audi. They are not going to want any obstacles to selling into the UK. The French are going to want un-fettered access to our market for their wine and cheese, the Spanish for their wine and olives etc. etc.

Immigration is not really an issue for me. This country has benefited hugely from immigration over the centuries. In my present job as a lorry driver every third fork lift truck driver or goods-in clerk is an eastern European. Something similar is probably true for the hospitality industry and the NHS. The country would not function without immigration. It would be nice to be able to control it so we get the people we need and not the people we don't want. However, I am not confident this will happen when we are out of Europe, especially given our track record with non EU immigration.

Freedom of movement was no problem before the accession of the eastern European states. The countries of western Europe had roughly similar economies. We now have economies as divergent as Romania and Bulgaria and Germany and Britain. If I lived in Romania I would be off to western Europe like a shot and I don't blame anyone who does. If I lived in Romania and was lucky enough to have a job I would be earning in the region of maybe £500 a month for a blue collar occupation. I would earn that in one week in a similar role in Germany or Britain. The mass migration that has ensued has produced a huge strain on resources such as housing, health and education. Figures for migration from the EU into the UK put migration at about 330,000 per annum. These figures are not produced by counting people in and out at passport control. They are compiled by a small army of people with clipboards questioning people at airports and on cross-channel ferries etc. No-one is obliged to answer questions and it would not be surprising if someone from eastern Europe heading to the UK to work was a little suspicious of being interrogated in this way. Further, if they do agree to be questioned, they are not counted in the figures at all if they say they intend to stay in the UK for less than one year. Many eastern Europeans come to the UK to work for 3 months, 6 months or 9 months then return to their home country. Many, like the Polish fork-lift truck driver I was talking to in Bristol last week, came intending to stay for a few months and has been here now for 12 years and has brought his wife and two children to join him. A better indicator of the numbers is perhaps the number of people from the EU applying for a British social security number. This is a requirement to work and/or claim benefits in the UK. In the year 2014 to 2015 in the region of 550,000 EU citizens applied for a British social security number. That is equivalent to half the population of Birmingham, Britain's second biggest city, in just one year and does not count people working here illegally. It is not a sustainable situation.

There is no way the hundreds of thousands of retired Brits and British second home owners currently living in, for instance, France, Spain and Cyprus (like Moira and her sister who were so hospitable to us when we visited) are going to be re-patriated to the UK. Apart from it requiring some kind of fascist regime in these countries to effect such an action these countries benefit hugely from the vast addition to their economies British ex-pats contribute.

OK, poorer regions of the UK get grants from Europe which go into local infrastructure but we only get back about two out of every three pounds we put into Europe. This is a very bad deal. Yes, I am also not confident that Wales, Cornwall and the north east will get the same funding from a future UK government as they get from Europe but at least we get to decide, not some un-elected eurocrat in Brussels. Most government or EU funded projects cost far more than they should and do not achieve what they were intended to anyway.

Both the science and education sectors are concerned about losing EU funding and european co-operation. Why? It is not in the interest of EU countries to stop co-operating with us in either area. Also, the UK government could perhaps put the full three out of three pounds into university research etc rather than losing one in three pounds into the bottomless money pit that is the EU. The same goes for security. It is in every country's interest to continue to co-operate and share intelligence once we are out of the union.

One of the main deciding factors for me was when David Cameron was doing his tour of Europe attempting to secure a better deal for Britain within Europe. He went to Poland and asked the Polish prime minister to back him in finding a way to stop British tax-payers' money being sent to Poland to support Polish children living in Poland and was told no. That is just wrong and demeaning to Britain. Polish workers living in the UK may be paying UK taxes but Polish children in Poland should be supported by the Polish state. Please remember what I wrote earlier about my affection and respect for Poland and eastern Europe.

Outside of the EU we will be able to trade freely with the rest of the world without the restriction of the EU. The EU has been trying to achieve a trade deal with North America for ten years without coming to any agreement. How many people are being paid to do this and at what cost with really no hope of reaching an agreement which will satisfy the USA, Canada and 28 EU countries with different self interests to protect? The UK could probably reach an agreement in ten weeks.

I must admit to being somewhat amazed at the reaction of some remainers to the vote, not least by some of the people on this blog. Some remainers seem to expect some kind of Armageddon to ensue. I would just like to say don't worry. Britain will be able to cope. It seemed to cope pretty well for the last several centuries before we joined the EU.

This country, Britain, is a truly great country with a fantastic past, present and most importantly, future. For me, the most infuriating thing about Britain is its lack of self-confidence. We need to believe in ourselves more. More than 50% of all the things that have ever been invented or discovered in the history of the world came from Britain and most of the others were from people of British origin. For example, Alexander Graham Bell is an American citizen credited with inventing the telephone. He was born in Edinburgh.

In the end I believe it comes down to a question of sovereignty. I think of myself as British first and European second. I am immensely proud and fortunate to be both. I don't believe the EU is truly democratic. The power lies with the EU commissioners who are appointed not elected. Further, I believe it is doomed to failure unless it reforms radically. Unemployment in Spain, Greece and Portugal is at around 25% and over 40% for the under 25s. I fully expect the euro to fail as a currency. It is currently being propped up but the fundamentals are not right. The EU is a failing project which is letting down its citizens. and it has not shown itself to be willing to reform.

I really hope the EU does view the Brexit vote as wake-up call and we can re-join a radically reformed EU; perhaps a two tier EU in which those countries who do really want an ever closer union can work towards it and those who don't, like Britain which has just voted quite clearly against these ideals, can continue to trade in a common market. Remember the common market?

To get back to the original post about import of US beef....surely we would not be forced to take it if it didn’t reach our standards. After all, all the world refused our beef when we had mad cow disease.And some people still aren’t convinced it is safe.

The biggest insanity of the referendum was to hold it as a 'first past the post' type vote ....... it could've been down to one vote!!!

Unfortunately, that is the system used in the UK. It has always been the same. It´s like being at Primary School - "who wants chocolate cake and who wants Vanilla cake?". First past the post.

Is it valid? Well I suppose it´s just as valid as a system which provides proportional representation. Each has its advantages and disadvantages.

However, there is one point that, as a TOTAL OUTSIDER ( I didn´t vote: I wouldn´t have voted even if I could have done so; I`ve been out of the country for 36 years) I would insist on. The British electoral system is based on "first past the post". Every elector in the UK KNOWS that the system is based on " first past the post" . When you lose ( or win) by one vote, it´s because you previously KNEW that the system was "first past the post". What´s the problem? Where´s the beef? If the system is not to one´s liking, then one should make a move to change it, but NOT moan about it when the results go against one. It´s like Canterbury United playing football against Manchester City. When they lose 14 -0 , the manager comes out and says the game was unfair, because they scored more goals. That, unfortunately, is the way Democracy works. Brutal, perhaps; extremely disagreeable (especially when the result is close), perhaps; but that´s how it works. In other countries, the system is different - but equally flawed.

KK ... It's not the way British democracy works. It wasn't an election the result of which can be changed every four years and which, in the event of a narrow majority depends on the cooperation of other elected representatives in order to function.

This country's democracy functions via the sovereignty of parliament and referendums have only ever had a place 'to advise'. Cameron made up the rules as he went along.

The risk of this after Brexit is that we won’t be”taking back control”. We will be at the mercy of the UK government and the big business that funds the party machine. Remember that any politician’s priority is to remain employed as an MP. They will agree to anything that achieves that goal. The concerns and needs of their constituents are, at best, secondary to that.

patpoyntz wrote:But surely it was the same sort of election which got us into the Common Market in the first place, and presumably that was ok.?Referendum I meant

No it wasn't the same ... we joined due to a decision taken by our elected government (Conservative) in 1973 ... not because of a referendum.

The following Labour government was split on the EEC and in '75 held a referendum asking whether Britain should stay in and there was a large majority for Yes. Margaret Thatcher said "“Everyone should turn out in this referendum and vote yes, so that the question is over once and for all ..." https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -last-time . The referendum was 'advisory' and it would have been up to the government to decide what to do should the answer have been no.

Suffs, I typed this up before I saw your post, it's not a response to it. Ratatoullie, your'e right.

"Now the time has come for you to decide. The Government will accept your decision - whichever way it goes.” Harold Wilson in 1975, as it was recognised the vote could not be binding on Parliament. I think it was a 50/50 but can’t be certain. I voted No then by the way.

I’m quite relaxed about this thread, think it’s great that we’re allowed to keep going but I need to mention the turn out for the Referendum was 72.2%.

I’m glad you posted that Guardian article aero280, as, once we sign an agreement with the USA we would have no control. The US of A doesn’t work like that.

Neither does the EU. The Greek Finance Minister, Yanis Varoufakis wrote a book, Adults in the Room on his experience in dealing with the EU - real scary stuff. I read it after the referendum, here’s the Guardian’s review.

cooksalot, suff and those expressing similar thoughts - I agree with you, it was appalling mess, but as KK points out it was all agreed by Parliament. DC put it to Parliament to have a referendum, they agreed, DC made it clear it would be 50/50 and that if only three people voted, with two voting one way that would be the result. We had the referendum and, eventually, Parliament voted by a majority (394) to trigger Article 50.

As I posted before I don’t think the election was gerrymandered, but I do think it was rigged. Ironically to get a Remain vote. Think about it. Keep the voting age to 18 to avoid too many young voters wanting to travel Europe, prevent ex-pats, who’ve lived abroad for a long time, voting cos they bound to favour where they’re living. And so on.

A mess, totally. An appalling way to run a first world country. But this is where we’re at - and seeing that smug lying face of BoJo asking to pull together (not sure how that works) makes me want to vomit.

Yesterday I had coffee with a bunch of people, some of whom had to scraped off the ceiling in the anger at all. I wish you well cooksalot and maybe MP’s will take note, but I don’t whether the deals will be making after leaving the EU will benefit me in my lifetime.

Mr Zosh, nice to hear from you again. We disagreed last time but I’ll pick out one small part of your post.

“… we only get back about two out of every three pounds we put into Europe. This is a very bad deal.”

A UKIP activist said exactly the same to me canvassing on the street.

I’m pleased that my rich country is helping a poor one.

One more thing; I'm old, my coffee morning friends also, we voted Remain. Our family is mostly young - most of them voted Leave. Go figure.

Every day is a good day, it's just that some days are better than others.

UKIP had a lot to do with it IMOWhile they don't seem to get many votes or members they did grab a lot of attention, far more than a small party could really have justified in terms of nunbersAnd that's the trouble with all these desicions, they are always made in an instant based in many cases on gut reaction to the last propaganda the voter heard, rather than making a balanced desicion based on a kind of checklist of pros and cons like you might use if buying a fridge or a holiday

Going back to 1970s there's no doubt that part of the popularity of Common Market entry was that General de Gaulle had said Non very loudly in the past, and that actually increased British determination to get in, I think if you looked at political cartoons of the time that woukd be clear, as I remember things

Well, I agree with that wholeheartedly.....from a very selfish point of view, we are shortly setting off for a 5 week break in Spain, and will enjoy driving on those wonderful wide, perfect, mostly free, and empty highways, many of which have been financed by EU. We will be getting away from the pot holes on our roads, which as Ian Rankin, a near neighbour, said last week are big enough to hide a body in. Unfortunately the EU will not be helping to pay the enormous repair bills on 2 of our vehicles caused by said pot holes

Yes, Im aware of that, Suffs, but even though the referendum was "advisory" - would Parliament really want to go against the will of the people? The "advice" was " get out" - so is Parliament going to ignore that?

The problem is we are where we are. Successive governments blamed the EU for stuff that was nothing to do with it through sheer laziness and unwillingness to explain to the electorate the real facts of life. Then when the EU became the bogeyman the conservatives reaped the whirlwind they'd sown and the whole referendum was badly run by bullies and fear mongers on both sides. There was no plan of what we would do if we left ... few if any had any idea of what the alternative would be like or how it would happen and quite a few thought a leave vote would mean that we left the EU immediately ... I still come across people who do not understand why there has to be a transition period ... the other day someone was going on about us needing to get out of the EU because of the European Court of Human Rights which is nothing to do with the EU ........ the whole thing was/is a farce. You really couldn't make it up if you tried.

suffolk wrote:The problem is we are where we are. Successive governments blamed the EU for stuff that was nothing to do with it through sheer laziness and unwillingness to explain to the electorate the real facts of life. Then when the EU became the bogeyman the conservatives reaped the whirlwind they'd sown and the whole referendum was badly run by bullies and fear mongers on both sides. There was no plan of what we would do if we left ... few if any had any idea of what the alternative would be like or how it would happen and thought a leave vote would mean that we left the EU immediately ... I still come across people who do not understand why there has to be a transition period ... the other day someone was going on about us needing to get out of the EU because of the European Court of Human Rights which is nothing to do with the EU ........ the whole thing was/is a farce. You really couldn't make it up if you tried.

What Suffs said!I think we will lose a lot by leaving the EU, not just the support and aid given to those areas where (bizzarely!) they mostly voted leave. I worry about the transportation of medical isotopes, aviation rules and problems that will be faced by roadhauliers just to name a few (and there are plenty). But the really big problem with leaving the Customs Union is the two borders the UK has with the EU, Northern Ireland and Gibraltar. How will they be sorted? Do we really want to threaten the Good Friday Agreement? We may see a united Ireland sooner rather than later. In terms of breaking up the UK the EU referendum has also breathed new life into calls for Scottish independence. But if it is the “will of the people” I suppose we all just have to put up with it and not complain.....At least we’ve got blue passports again! No.. wait, didn’t they used to actually be black and in fact we could have changed the colour any time we wanted.

cooksalot wrote:But the really big problem with leaving the Customs Union is the two borders the UK has with the EU, Northern Ireland and Gibraltar. How will they be sorted? Do we really want to threaten the Good Friday Agreement? We may see a united Ireland sooner rather than later.

I don't think that anyone in government ever gave it a thought .............. negligence verging on treasonous behaviour .

Reflecting a little more on the above ... isn't the problem that the argument for Brexit for a lot of people seemed to be "we want to go back to the way things used to be" ...totally forgetting that the rest of the world has moved on and things aren't where they were

cooksalot wrote:And was that mythical time “the way things used to be” really so great?

It was wonderful;No consumer protection.No poor air regulations.No poor water regulations.Sewers going straight into the sea or rivers.No recycling targets.All forced on to various resistant governments. Poor air quality? We have been complaining and campaigning about that in London since the 70s and probably earlier, only repeated EU air quality/emissions demands has shifted them at last.

cooksalot wrote:And was that mythical time “the way things used to be” really so great?

It was wonderful;No consumer protection.No poor air regulations.No poor water regulations.Sewers going straight into the sea or rivers.No recycling targets.All forced on to various resistant governments. Poor air quality? We have been complaining and campaigning about that in London since the 70s and probably earlier, only repeated EU air quality/emissions demands has shifted them at last.

Fantastic, soon 'The good old days' will be back.

All great points miss mouse! And Suffs the antibiotics in meat stuff in the Guardian article is just scary....

Yes, it was a good idea to start this thread. Whatever happens with the EU the quality and integrity of our food is something that I am sure is important to everyone on this board. I certainly don’t fancy a large dollop of antibiotic with my chicken... or chlorine!

I am finding this thread very interesting and so refreshing that the matter is being discussed without rudeness or censorship.

I would especially like to thank aero for his comments 13/2/18 @ 11.08am which I feel apply to the country whether we stay in the EU or not and are the best words I have read on the matter anywhere.

The fact remains that we are no longer a grand Empire pillaging the planet and bossing everyone around to make us feel mighty, others have taken over from us. We are still at the mercy of an undemocratic 'democracy' and in the hands of a generation which has largely not been taught how to think or lead, with a workforce which much of the time does not seem to realise that it is being paid to knuckle down and work and a huge number of people excluded from doing anything when all they need is a bit of help. As a nation we have lost the plot. All great empires have a lifecycle ... sadly we have reached the downward stage in ours and I'm not sure it will matter ultimately if we are in the EU or not, it may just mean we hit rock bottom sooner or later than we might have. We have had so many chances to lead in new and innovative ways but society has been dumbed down to such an extent that apathy appears to be all we can offer.

Of course, we are a small cog in a larger global mess and if the human race doesn't stop raping and pillaging the planet and reproducing then Brexit will soon be the least of our worries anyway. Interesting times, it could work out well for us if we all had the right attitude but I fear that we can only hope for a miracle now!

I see where you´re at, Suffs. A lot of people over here asked me if I was in favour, or against Brexit. I said " neither; I haven´t lived there for over 30 years!"But I did get the distinct impression, from the news and the press, that nobody really had a clue about what a Brexit would involve. Now it´s too late. Change is inevitable and you either get on the train or you´re left behind.

If anyone saw Matt Forde's Unsprung XL on Dave last might (now on the UK TV hub) Richard Herring did a stand up abkut how people chose how to vote and how they line up now. While it's quite clear which side he is on I think he was very even handed, and very funnyProper cheered me up

Anyone remember the Referendum Party? In the 1990’s leaving the EU wasn’t a minor skirmish with UKIP but a live debate with about 30% of the population wanting to leave.

The Conservative manifesto in 2015 promised a referendum.

“we will give the British people a referendum with a very simple in-or-out choice to stay in the EU,

"If we left the European Union, it would be a one-way ticket, not a return,” Cameron BBC News January 23 2013

He won, got 36.9% of the vote; the country voted to have a referendum.

Followed by Parliament voting to hold a referendum by a massive majority.

The Referendum took place, 37% of the voters voted to leave. (almost the same percentage as for the Tories in the election)

Parliament voted to leave the EU by 36 votes in September 2017.

and

“I can confirm that the Government will bring forward a motion on the final agreement, to be approved by both Houses of Parliament before it is concluded. We expect and intend that this will happen before the European Parliament debates and votes on the final agreement.” David Davis, Hansard, 26 October 2017.

It’s Democracy.

Every day is a good day, it's just that some days are better than others.

“An unprecedented drive to lobby ministers to ditch strict EU safety standards in order to secure a US trade deal is being drawn up by a transatlantic group of conservative thinktanks, it has emerged. Organisers of the self-styled “shadow trade talks”, which are set to include 10 leading rightwing and libertarian groups from the UK and the US, are preparing to push their “ideal free trade agreement” that would allow the import of US meats, drugs and chemicals banned in Britain.The conservative groups involved include the Heritage Foundation, which has pushed for the lifting of environmental protections, and the Cato Institute, co-founded by billionaire oil barons Charles and David Koch. In Britain the project is being overseen by the Initiative for Free Trade (IFT), an organisation founded by the hard-Brexit advocate and Tory MEP Daniel Hannan.According to a document outlining the project, mistakenly published online by the IFT, the groups will “hash out an ‘ideal’ US-UK free trade agreement (FTA)” that includes Britain recognising US standards which are widely seen as weaker than those adopted by the EU. Such a move would allow imports of chlorinated chicken and hormone-reared beef to be sold in the UK for the first time.”

Good point.Let's hope we continue to see countries of origin on labels.I have been avoiding stuff such as Thai chicken and Polish mushrooms for years.We have home grown produce which is similarly priced so that's what I go for.

In my local supermarket today, British mushrooms were 89p and Polish ones were 79p.